Subject: Re: /etc/rc vs /etc/init.d, take N
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
Date: 04/01/1996 08:28:19
> i *like* having /etc/rc and /etc/rc.local, not because i want to edit
> them, but, because i *like* that i can easily see what is going to
Well, I do want to edit them because I disagree with whoever's
maintaining them on a few points, but this is a significant win for me:
that I have the startup actions all collected together in one place.
> i don't see why you think it is a waste of time to support a _long_
> time traditional BSD syntax. there are _many_ in the BSD world who
> simple *like* /etc/rc. it doesn't really matter what their reasons
I'm one of them. But then, I also like the Berkeley tty driver
interface. (Indeed, one of my dumb terminals _needs_ the Berkeley tty
driver interface because it's got the LTILDE bit.) I like a bunch of
traditional Berkeley things that NetBSD has abandoned, and indeed when
I first started using NetBSD one of the first things I did was to get
upset at how little NetBSD seemed to care about compatability with
> i will maintain the /etc/rc stuff myself, if it is needed.
And I'll maintain it for myself as necessary too. I'm mainly concerned
about the possibility that parts of NetBSD - not just third-party
packages - start to break if you don't have init.d all populated with a
buncha scripts for this and that.